Bibliographic Details
Title: |
Propuesta de análisis del discurso probatorio. |
Alternate Title: |
A proposal of analysis of the evidential discourse. |
Authors: |
LIRA RODRÍGUEZ, RENATO1 renatolirarodriguez@gmail.com |
Source: |
EMPIRIA: Revista de Metodología de Ciencias Sociales. ene-abr2025, Issue 63, p15-39. 25p. |
Subject Terms: |
*JUDGES, *EXPERT evidence, *JUSTICE administration, *DISCOURSE analysis, *LEGAL judgments |
Abstract (English): |
This paper conducts an evidentiary discursive analysis of a Chilean judicial sentence of high public impact. It is a propositional and exploratory research that links evidential reasoning with discourse analysis to examine the different arguments and, ultimately, the various representations of the world in dispute at the time of proving a fact. Based on this, the research focuses on three aspects of the judicial sentence that were decisive and conflictive in the accreditation of a fact: the discordant statements of the victim, the contradictory expert evidence and the disagreement between the judges that made up the court. Regarding the first aspect, the way in which the court takes into account the bonding and affective relationship that the victim had with the accused is analyzed. On the second aspect, we delineate how expert evidence (and science) can provide explanations to confirm a version of the facts that specialists explain in court. On the third aspect, the existence of divergent decisions among judges themselves and their possible damage to the legitimacy of the justice system is analyzed. All these issues are striking because, although empirical analysis is an essential component in that the truth of the facts proven guarantees a correct application of the law, it must be reconciled with an approach that also rescues the interests in dispute, the discursive organization of the judges, and the discursive organization of the judges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
Abstract (Spanish): |
Este trabajo realiza un análisis discursivo probatorio sobre una sentencia judicial chilena de alto impacto público. Es una investigación propositiva y exploratoria que vincula razonamiento probatorio con el análisis del discurso para examinar las distintas argumentaciones y, en definitiva, las variadas representaciones del mundo en disputa al momento de probar un hecho. A partir de ello, la investigación se enfoca en tres aspectos de la sentencia judicial que fueron determinantes y conflictivos en la acreditación de un hecho jurídicamente relevante: las declaraciones discordantes de la víctima, la prueba pericial contradictoria y el desacuerdo entre los jueces que conformaban el tribunal. Sobre el primer aspecto, se analiza la forma en que el tribunal se hace cargo de la relación vincular y afectiva que mantenía la víctima con el acusado. Sobre el segundo aspecto, se delinea cómo la prueba pericial (y la ciencia) puede aportar explicaciones propicias para confirmar una versión de los hechos que los especialistas explican en juicio. Sobre el tercer aspecto, se analiza la existencia de decisiones divergentes entre los mismos jueces y su posible lesión a la legitimidad del sistema de justicia. Todos estos asuntos resultan llamativos porque, si bien el análisis empírico es un componente esencial en cuanto la verdad de los hechos probados garantiza una correcta aplicación del derecho, aquello debe ser conciliado con un enfoque que también rescate los intereses en disputa, la organización discursiva de las narraciones y el impacto de las decisiones judiciales en la sociedad. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|
Copyright of EMPIRIA: Revista de Metodología de Ciencias Sociales is the property of Editorial UNED and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
Database: |
Academic Search Complete |